I largely agree with anarchist philosopher Stef Molyneux. But I am not a member of his site. You can search my name, you won't find me.

By the way, I had a happy childhood. Many of my life long friends didn't.

I really can’t speak for you or your family or how you feel about each other. It all comes down to how you feel about the person, what values the relationship brings to you spiritually. If you have a living and happy relationship with your parents—good! Joy to the world.

As for parents housing, feeding and clothing a child—but who nevertheless subjected that child to an array of abuses (despite the fact the child didn’t die of starvation)—that would be a moral outrage--nobody could properly criticize that child to have nothing to do with those parents once reaching childhood.

But such is rarely the case.

If that person decides to sever the relationship, that person is roundly criticized; they are at the receiving end of a storm of sanctimonies bromides and platitudes unlike that of any other relationship. “But they are your parents!”

If a women decides to dissolve a marriage because of abuse—we commend her. If an adult child decides to end a relationship with his or her parents (after decades of abuse) they are pelted with guilt and shame at the very idea.

And so the dysfunction continues on.

What is the glue that keeps such relationships “functioning”? Fear of ostracism. Fear of being disconnected from one’s roots (when one can establish that with their own family). Fear of being cut off from all the material goodies. Fear of being considered a bad person, etc. Guilt, shame, opportunism, etc. You name whatever you want on the altruist shopping list you care for.

Look, I am merely saying that whatever makes chosen relationships healthy and happy, whatever values we expect to receive and are prepared to offer—the exact same standard ought to be applied to family members.

Sharon Bonner asks:

Why are we expected to ‘love’ our family members—a motley crew usually comprised of manipulators, criminals, insufferable flakes, drunks, drug addicts, back-stabbers, fakes, molesters, imps, hypocrites and scoundrels or whatever else the accident of biology happened to confer upon us--with a greater loyalty than chosen relationships?

If Sharon has had an upbringing by manipulators, criminals, drunks, addicts, molesters . . . I feel sorry for her, and invite her to follow the path laid out by cult leader Stefan Molyneux:

"Deep down I do not believe that there are any really good parents out there - the same way that I do not believe there were any really good doctors in the 10th century."

Sharon, your experience of abuse at the hands of Your Family is a sad one. I suggest you cut off all contact with your family. They sound like a monstrous pack of fiends.

Those of us who had a normal family upbringing hope that you can find new 'sisters' and 'brothers' in the Molyneux cult.

WSS

I would have thought this hypnotising effect was rather simple. Most families have 'been there' for all our lives. They support, accept, give and offer comradere to us. They also cause havock because they are our strongest critics and the most honest ones too. These are the people that we have been close to, that have watched us change and we have watched them change. Now, in saying that, I have no business with my extended family, uncles, cousins and the like, simply because I don't know them all that well and I'm not fussed to get to know them well either. As far as our parents are concerned, even if we don't like them all that much, it would take quite a serious gripe to part ways. I hold a kind of loyalty, support and generosity for them because I acknowledge all that they have done for me. I, and I'm sure many others, hold a special place in their hearts for our families for that reason. Again I think it would have to be a serious mis-conduct in order to dispel of that relationship, a much more serious one than that of a friend for example...

Now, what's so terrible about that??

I hear you on the altruism bit. I really do. But I still say that there is a hypnotizing effect that the family has on the individual than is not similar to other relationships. In fact, when people join cults ['Manson Family] or even get swooped up in political hordes…they are looking to return to a “family” of sorts.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with 'family'. There's everything wrong with altruism. It isn't 'family' that might make family bad.

“Family” has become a social fiction that is worshipped in similar fashion to how religionists worship “God”.

Durkheim's "S"ociety, however, -- the highest form of psychic life, the consciousness of consciousness, that sees all and knows all from above, from above and beyond all mere local and individual contingencies-- is 'real.' Why, we just blow right by 'family' to get to the 'real' worshippable entity, "S"ociety.

Please. Society, from socius: from the latin, 'ally, companion, known associate.'

I'm glad I have absolutely no idea what the Hell a 'social' fiction is. The world is full of folks who havebeen hopelessly 'socialized' from birth, complete religious zealots. For them, the only reality is 'social' reality. Totally appropriate belief system--for a church, on a Sunday.

...but I know very few people who don't still have an emotional attachment to their families.

But I also don't know of anyone who is not uncritical of them either.

Family members tend to be the greatest critics of one another.

I don't live close to my family and we don't see each other often, but when we do it is like visiting an old friend.

I would not say one has a duty to one's parents, to like them or even interact with them.

However, assuming your parents are decent people (i.e. they treated you well and are benevolent) - I believe that they deserve more respect than strangers for the fact that they clothed, fed, cared for you and (hopefully) educated you.

The family can be the tiniest of Totalitarian regimes, but one of which where a single gun is never pointed at you. It is a mental imprisonment.

I would argue that bad parenting is the rule, not the exception. If you actually enjoy family functions and share a genuine love with your parents and siblings, you truly won the emotional lottery.

Enjoy virtuous people, family members or otherwise. To hell with "The Family"

...my position is this: we are born into a family, every one of us. We have no control over that. It's perfectly natural, and it is what it is.

We can only look *back*, hopefully with a clear mind and evaluate it for what it was, for better or worse. I think most of us come out of it with minimal baggage, with mixed emotions for our parents and siblings. That is the way of the world and it will always be that way.

All we can do is adhere to a philosophy that teaches a love of mind and independence, and act upon it, as parents ourselves, or as intellectuals who have influence over parents.

The greatest gift a child can have is to encounter someone who utters a kind, encouraging word at the most opportune moment. From that great things can grow.

"...it is often the cause of much strife and anguish in one's life. I think good mental health comes from understanding why that is."

That’s an astute observation, Ross. The question of good mental health (and happiness) is very relevant to this topic, but an honest examination of our parent’s moral character (assuming it to be horrid) is rarely identified—and if it is, this does not alter the now adult child’s behavior too much as he/she continues to confer his time and energy (and even resources) to those parents. Of course, Rand’s essay “duty versus causality” does come to mind. I have argued that there is no greater power disparity than that of a child and a parent.

No matter what abuses and evils the child might have been subjected to as a child…the relationship thrives, no matter what unhappiness it continues to bring into adulthood.

The myth of the family is practically iron-clad. While one may select and drop religious and political allegiances, the family remains a fortified cult.

...it is often the cause of much strife and anguish in one's life.

I think good mental health comes from understanding why that is. We are brought up in families. It's a unique environment, and for some very practical reasons, and at an early age, we asked to submit to things we never would if not for the family environment. And we are too young to know any better. But parents, be they good, bad or indifferent have obligations by virtue of the fact that they produced us. We can only hope that they understand the difference between merely producing offspring and creating independent humans.

I recall being dragged kicking and screaming to a church camp when I was very young. I hid in a tree for most of the weekend. And my folks weren't overtly religious. They just thought it would be good for me. I didn't agree.

Still don't.

"...families are not in themselves the problem, it's the implied obligation."

I would agree. It is an obligation that is too often submitted too, and that does include Libertarians and Objectivists. I would submit that the espousing of political freedom becomes an inconsistency if freedom is not applied to all departments of one’s life.

...your friends but you don't choose your family.

That said, families are not in themselves the problem, it's the implied obligation.

Hank Rearden is a case in point. The sanction of the victim.